John A Discourse on Lestrade
by Catherine Spark
Summary: This was a prompt from Caighlee, and as such I dedicate this story to her. Attached to, but not part of, "The Two Bloggers"


_**Posted by John H. Watson**_

One thing that works against Sherlock very badly, and yet seems to be completely incomprehensible to him, is that there is more than one way to express almost everything under the sun. For example, I think that Sherlock's self-induced 'sociopathy' of which he is so proud, is largely due to a scorn of emotions based on a theory that each one gives rise to a predictable, exaggerated and stereotyped response. For example, in his mind a sad person will cry and fixate on the subject of their sadness; an angry person will lash out; a happy person will punch the air and chatter on and on about whatever it is that makes them happy, and a scared person will scream the place down and run for their lives. He abhors romance above all the other emotions. In his mind, romance clouds peoples' judgements, like a spiked drink. It makes them self-centred and likely to act irrationally and without thought, hurting themselves, the ones they love, and everyone in contact with them.

It's upon these stereotyped reactions that he often bases his deductions and plans, and although he solves about ninety-five per cent of the cases that come his way, it's this habit which is almost invariably his downfall. It's also this habit that leads to his disdain for the police. In his mind, his way of doing things is the _only _way of doing them. When he fails he will always reflect on his mistakes and what he could learn from them, but he rarely reflects on what other people did _right _and what he could learn from _them_. As the 'world's only consulting detective,' it doesn't really occur to him that anyone else could have anything to teach him.

Lestrade, for example. I would say I am fairly close to Sherlock in terms of understanding how he works and what motivates and infuriates him, but Lestrade has still known Sherlock for longer than me. He had faith in Sherlock long before I did, and actually, if I'm truthful, it was Lestrade's words that made me feel I could put trust in Sherlock's character. "One day, if we're very, very lucky, he might even be a good one," he said. I was bowled over. Five years – five years and he still hadn't got a handle on the man! And yet, after all this time of waiting and hoping and guessing and disappointments, he still believed in Sherlock's integrity. Therefore there had to be something about the man that was worth putting five years' worth of faith in.

What did this teach me about Sherlock? Nothing very much, but it did teach me a bit about Lestrade. Sherlock would just say that Lestrade needed him for his work, of course. But it's more than that. Moriarty used people for his work all the time – it's different from blindly having faith in them despite not knowing what they're up to, or placing hope in them as a person. Is this something Lestrade should be proud of? I'm not at all sure. If I was Lestrade's senior and heard that he had been taking the instructions of an unknown 'sociopath' and trusting him and his words, and letting him into the system with no clue as to what he was doing or why he was doing it, I would probably be extremely worried. What if Moriarty had been the first person to capitalise on this aspect of Lestrade's personality?

Sherlock often underestimates Lestrade. Lestrade may arguably be a pretty crap detective, but who isn't when compared to Sherlock? In his defence, he never gives up – he's continued to see the good in Sherlock for five years despite Sherlock's reluctance and absolute resistance to being seen as good, and despite the snarky and often less than competent people he is put in charge of. And he's one of the few people I have ever seen who has not been corrupted by power. He still has strong principles and is not afraid to put Sherlock in his place with regards to this, even if his career depends on Sherlock's input.

There are all kinds of dedication: There's Sherlock's obsessive, impatient, turbo-driven type of dedication, and there's Lestrade's remaining-at-his-post-come-what-may type of dedication that quietly goes on over many years and subtly shapes the entire police force. If it hadn't been for the fact that I instantly trusted the character of _Lestrade, _it may well have been that I wouldn't have trusted his initial opinion of _Sherlock_ and put my faith in him too. And if I hadn't done that I wouldn't now have the staunch, protective, infuriating and endlessly fascinating flatmate that I do.


End file.
